Obama does not have sympathy for Israel. America does
domenica 1 marzo 2015 English 0 commenti
When Benjamin Netanyahu entered the House Chamber on Capitol Hill where American Senators and Congressmen gathered to listen to his much-criticized speech, I felt a deep stirring of emotion and, especially, envy for such applauses and such warmth. Friends and critics, also the harsh ones of them, of the incumbent government of Jerusalem were present there. The controversy that had besieged the long and much gossiped-about eve of the Israeli Prime Minister’s address was echoing in every corner of the globe. And it persuaded some Democrats – including even Vice President Biden – to announce their absence during Netanyahu’s address. Yet, the hall was bursting at the seams, full of people and, above all, of love for Israel and the Jews.There was no air of arrogance; it was not the big country receiving the small one with contempt. It was the fellowship of those who managed to remain true to themselves in spite of their harsh living conditions. The fellowship between those who know the difficulties of a life on the frontier, of the grudge of many for the cutting-edge science and technology, a resentment that spawns hatred and slander. It was a man-to-man encounter, with no subtexts nor political correctness, with no messages nor indications about what Israel should do in order to be liked. It was just about caring for those who fight for survival, sparing no effort, day after day, while maintaining the difficult rules of democracy.This affection expressed itself intensely, proving that, even if Obama is not so sympathetic to Israel, the American people actually are. The cold politically correct atmosphere of the European Union could never be able – as the US does - to show Israel its crucial support, its sympathy for a people that returned to its own land after 2000 years and that is doing its best to comply with the rules of civilization even amid unending attacks. Europe does not know the Bible and, as it is evident these days, it did not completely come to terms with its anti-Semitic history, as democracy is part of its very recent history.
Europe obeys thousands of unwritten laws that govern its cautious, hypocrite, and uncertain behaviors that, in turn, define its difficult internal relationships. Bibi could never manage to receive 23 standing ovations in Europe, especially in a contentious situation like the one that always follows him around. And in particular now, considering the electoral campaign. Instead, the people’s delegates in Washington stood up 23 times to applaud him. How did the much-maligned visit go? In the first place, it must not be measured on the sympathy or the aversion it may have raised in Obama, who felt overstepped by the invitation of the president of the United Chambers, Peter Beinart. There are much more important parameters, and Obama – with best wishes - will be President for two more years and then we will see. Above all, the divine aura that constantly circles him from the day he received the Nobel Prize for Peace just after his election, while the world properly applauded the enormous and wonderful news of a black President, by now has acquired some rhetorical and deifying connotation that is not convincing at all. His “lese-majesty” attitude because Beinart did not inform him about the invitation – even if disguised through analyses regarding the appropriateness of Bibi addressing the most important American assembly in times of electoral campaign, badly covered the fear that the Congress, generally very focused on internal policy, could suddenly wake up to the Iranian threat. The US President is afraid that it could hold him back on the way to an agreement with the country of the Ayatollahs that Bibi defined “a bad deal”, actually, “a very bad deal”. On the contrary, Obama sees it exactly as a legacy of his presidency, as a bridge toward the Islamic world, an important alliance. Moreover, he believes that, once a deal is signed, Iran will become more moderate. It is not clear what will happen in the next few weeks, but something already happened for sure. Again, the spotlight is dramatically focused on the topic “a deal with Iran”, which negotiations seem to be near to a conclusion in Switzerland, where Kerry is pressing to get a legacy of peace for Obama that should redeem his presidency’s scarce results in the international field. Nevertheless, Bibi managed to achieve the first goal: he revived the attention toward what his government is doing about Iran. Now, the elected members of the Congress and the Senate will not fail to demand an explanation about the points Bibi raised during his address. For example, after the speech, the Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein, who had attacked Netanyahu because for having accepted Beinart’s invitation, said that it would be also her preference the setting-up of a period of time of several decades during which Iran should freeze its uranium-enriching activities, just as Bibi said. She does not trust them anymore.
Once flooded Obama with congratulations and thanks, Netanyahu tried to dismantle what it is known of the forthcoming agreement: it should leave Iran with at least 6,000 centrifuges, an enormous number but uranium enrichment should be suspended for about ten years. “The blink of an eye in the history of a nation”, as Bibi said, arguing that the Ayatollah’s regime remains what it is. There is no way it will keep any promise, because its faith and ideology forbid it.
With 6,000 centrifuges and all the available facilities, Iran will remain capable to produce the atomic bomb within months, and Netanyahu spent several minutes explaining how the Iranian regime, even since the “moderate” Rouhani is in office, should be considered completely untrustworthy. It will lie to any IAEA inspector. Bibi pointed out how Iran already controls four capitals in the Middle East - Teheran, Baghdad, Beirut, and Sanaa – and how its cravings for expansion are spiced with gestures that make it the first sponsor of the attacks on the civilian population worldwide, despite Isis’ presence. He also pointed out how Israel is the primary target of Iran, a country unceasingly proposing its destruction. In addition, all the moderate Sunni countries as Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia dread a strengthening of Iran. Moreover, Iran’s humanitarian records are such that it is impossible to ignore the hanging of homosexual in public squares, the oppression and detention of women and dissidents.
Netanyahu suggested that the way for an agreement with Teheran is to demand Iran to be a normal country if it wants to have normal living conditions, namely to be relieved of its sanctions. It should renounce to attack the Middle-Eastern countries, repudiate terrorism and put a halt to the continuous intimidation toward Israel. Is it possible? It does not seem so. However, even without obtaining full results according to “Netanyahu’s plan”, a less accommodating negotiation could be envisaged, where Iran would be called to account for any of these crucial points raised by Netanyahu. What really matters is to manage to picture, according to Israel’s indications, a different Iran, without the genocidal intentions it is currently showing, a country not so plainly zealot and intolerant as the Ayatollahs. In other words, a country ready to engage in a serious relationship and not in petty diplomacies full of meaningless ceremonies, with some countries asking for the dismantlement – already refused - of Iran’s nuclear power. Let us also add that, again, Obama is terribly wrong in thinking that a good deal with Iran would help to defeat Isis or the Islamic extremism in general. On the ground there are still the ruins left by the Shia-Sunni conflict that had characterized the Iran-Iraq war. None of the opponents had any reassuring trait back then, nor do they have it now. Both were, and are, dangerous antagonists of the West and unpresentable violators of human rights. Iran used to send its children, with a plastic key to Paradise around their necks, charging across minefields to make a path for the army that would follow behind them. Things have not changed today. The Iranian people and the global situation are suffering together the damage continuously inflicted by the regime on all men of good will. The Iranian people, a real people with a great history, deserves a true deal, not a bad deal with the West.